2
   

I'm starting to have a real problem with going to school

 
 
bmcreider
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 01:37 pm
@Yogi DMT,
Exactly. Wink boop it
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 01:37 pm
@bmcreider,
bmcreider;118246 wrote:
Intellectually judged, judged on confidence and/or ability, judged on sexual prowess, even...

All wrong. Judging someone based on their car is just as immoral, and useless, as judging someone based on their toaster.

And I'm a car guy - and I do it inadvertently all the time. But I don't take myself seriously.


Well, I did not say that if a person is judged for some things on the basis of the car he drive, that is not silly. But, it doesn't follow from that that all judgments made on that basis are silly. It would depend on the judgment.
bmcreider
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 01:50 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;118256 wrote:
Well, I did not say that if a person is judged for some things on the basis of the car he drive, that is not silly. But, it doesn't follow from that that all judgments made on that basis are silly. It would depend on the judgment.


Well, I suppose that's the shorter way to say it, yes.
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 01:58 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;118254 wrote:
No. He might just need the job.


Perhaps he is an out-of-work NASCAR driver and this is all
that this cruel society has left for him to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LIifYLOcz0
0 Replies
 
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 02:43 pm
@bmcreider,
bmcreider;118246 wrote:
Intellectually judged, judged on confidence and/or ability, judged on sexual prowess, even...

All wrong. Judging someone based on their car is just as immoral, and useless, as judging someone based on their toaster.

And I'm a car guy - and I do it inadvertently all the time. But I don't take myself seriously.


I don't agree that it's immoral and useless. Someone who drives a pimp car is probably not white and nerdy, poor people don't drive ferraris, and few environmentalists drive hummers. These are all clues, as much as peoples actions are just clues--nice people can say mean things and sociopaths can say nice things.

Some people will seize on superficial details and jump to conclusions, this is what you are talking about and it's pretty stupid I agree.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 03:09 pm
@bmcreider,
bmcreider;118262 wrote:
Well, I suppose that's the shorter way to say it, yes.


Judging, for some reason, is often used with a negative connotation. Judging is not always bad, is it?

Let's go back to the car example, for a moment:

Quote:
So, like TickTock is saying, if someone doesn't like his car because it's a Kia, not a Jag, he should be dismissive of such thoughts as they aren't based in reason.


Why should he be dismissive of such thoughts?
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 03:53 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;118285 wrote:
Judging, for some reason, is often used with a negative connotation. Judging is not always bad, is it?

Let's go back to the car example, for a moment:

Quote:
So, like TickTock is saying, if someone doesn't like his car because it's a Kia, not a Jag, he should be dismissive of such thoughts as they aren't based in reason.


Why should he be dismissive of such thoughts?


This isn't precisely what I was saying. I was suggesting that perhaps it is a mistake to spend too much time looking at oneself in the mirror that society holds up to you, as you will often appear as far more distorted than you actually are.

And no, judging is not always a bad thing. Often, it is what keeps us traveling along our timeline. Some appearances can help us judge. There is a reason some snakes have rattles, for instance.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 04:20 pm
@Yogi DMT,
TickTockMan wrote:
This isn't precisely what I was saying. I was suggesting that perhaps it is a mistake to spend too much time looking at oneself in the mirror that society holds up to you, as you will often appear as far more distorted than you actually are.


You're a part of society, just as I am. I'm not quite sure what mirror you think society holds up to you, that you can't, or don't, hold up to yourself. Do you think you could be a bit more specific?

Quote:
There is a reason some snakes have rattles, for instance.


Indeed, and we could judge, for instance, that if we saw a snake with a rattle, that it is not an anaconda (as anacondas do not have rattles).

What I'm most interested in is the point in which judging transforms from a thing which simply allows us to sort and understand data, to a negativistic approach. The point where you think it compromises the individual in some way. And that's the impression I've got from you and bm - that it is wiser not to judge ourselves in some cases, in fear of self-condemnation of some sort. It was almost like a word of advice given, something one would find in a self-help book.

So, just what are those cases, and why do you think we should avoid them? And, if you would, contrast these with cases where you don't think judging is a bad thing at all.
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 05:16 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;118303 wrote:
You're a part of society, just as I am. I'm not quite sure what mirror you think society holds up to you, that you can't, or don't, hold up to yourself. Do you think you could be a bit more specific?


Perhaps the mirror analogy was not apt. My point, I think, is that if you allow yourself to become disconsolate because you don't think you have the right car, clothes, or hairdo based only on current widely embraced social trends and your perception of the bearing of said trends on your own sense of value as a human being, then you are at risk of shortchanging yourself as to your actual potential long-term worth. At this point, one might make the judgement that I am full of crap. Am I compromised as an individual now, or has the data I'm emitting simply been correctly sorted?


Zetherin;118303 wrote:

What I'm most interested in is the point in which judging transforms from a thing which simply allows us to sort and understand data, to a negativistic approach. The point where you think it compromises the individual in some way. And that's the impression I've got from you and bm - that it is wiser not to judge ourselves in some cases, in fear of self-condemnation of some sort. It was almost like a word of advice given, something one would find in a self-help book.

So, just what are those cases, and why do you think we should avoid them? And, if you would, contrast these with cases where you don't think judging is a bad thing at all.


When judgement crosses over into stereotyping, I think, is when individuals are compromised.
Yet, some stereotypes are true. So what is one to do?

Do you not think that we are too hard on ourselves at times, and often unfairly?

I sound like a self-help book. Ouch and arrgh. You have cut me to the quick, Zetherin!
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 05:43 pm
@bmcreider,
bmcreider;118262 wrote:
Well, I suppose that's the shorter way to say it, yes.


But that is not saying the same thing, only more economically. It is different.
bmcreider
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Jan, 2010 10:09 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;118332 wrote:
But that is not saying the same thing, only more economically. It is different.


More economically, for sure.

Zetherin;118303 wrote:

So, just what are those cases, and why do you think we should avoid them? And, if you would, contrast these with cases where you don't think judging is a bad thing at all.


I say to not judge someone on a superficial basis. Skin color, for example. Gender, for another. Those kinds of things should not make a black and white judgment about a person. So, to judge someone, based on their car selection of a BMW - is a bit of a jump to conclusions, too black and white. You can eliminate some things, such as, this person probably is not poor - but to judge them negatively, and say they are "rich" and therefore "snobby" or "undeserving" is to project, really, your own deficiency you feel about your own car. In this one instance, of that car brand, is an example.

Where you can feel free to judge someone is when they are killing another human being, where they are physically harming someone, or something, when they are stealing, cheating, or lying. These are negative things, and a negative "judgment" is justified.
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 10:57 am
@bmcreider,
bmcreider;118415 wrote:


Where you can feel free to judge someone is when they are killing another human being, where they are physically harming someone, or something, when they are stealing, cheating, or lying. These are negative things, and a negative "judgment" is justified.


But what if I harm someone who is harming another?
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 12:22 pm
@Yogi DMT,
TickTockMan wrote:

When judgement crosses over into stereotyping, I think, is when individuals are compromised.
Yet, some stereotypes are true. So what is one to do?


What is the urgency to do anything? Simply be mature about the stereotypes and call people out who do not provide sufficient evidence for why they are stereotyping. No need to put up with bigots.

Quote:

Perhaps the mirror analogy was not apt. My point, I think, is that if you allow yourself to become disconsolate because you don't think you have the right car, clothes, or hairdo based only on current widely embraced social trends and your perception of the bearing of said trends on your own sense of value as a human being, then you are at risk of shortchanging yourself as to your actual potential long-term worth.


But you can become disconsolate about anything, not simply those things we refer as superficial and material. I, for instance, become disconsolate regarding some things intellectual (which I discuss on this forum). Is this any better?

Once again, I'm looking for why you're targetting those things material and superficial, and dismissing everything else that people can, and do, obsess over and become disconsolate about. And, more importantly, I want to know why you think judging someone on their material possessions is necessarily fallacious (if you do... I got the impression you do, as you keep pointing it out).

bmcreider wrote:

I say to not judge someone on a superficial basis. Skin color, for example. Gender, for another. Those kinds of things should not make a black and white judgment about a person


Superficial is a judgment in and of itself. Doctors profile races and genders in the consideration of disease susceptibilities all the time. Are these doctors being superficial when they conclude that Y race is more susceptible to X disease or that A gender is more susceptible to B disease? Of course not. They provide good reason for why they would judge someone of Y race differently than they would someone of X race in specific cases. And there's nothing wrong with this. In fact, it helps the medical community understand how to treat specific groups of individuals.

Quote:

Where you can feel free to judge someone is when they are killing another human being, where they are physically harming someone, or something, when they are stealing, cheating, or lying. These are negative things, and a negative "judgment" is justified.


Judgments need not be negative or positive. Some judgments are neutral. But you're wrong. Positive judgments can also be justified, and so can neutral judgments (like my doctor example). When judgments aren't justified (no good reason), that's when we start getting into things like prejudice, which is what it seems you're advocating against.
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 12:42 pm
@Zetherin,
If I understand correctly, bmc is saying that many people judge too quickly based on superficial things. They see what clothes you are wearing or what beer you are drinking and judge you negatively. This is certainly true. TickTock is a suggesting as a solution that we care less about what snobby people think about us.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 12:55 pm
@Jebediah,
Jebediah;118534 wrote:
If I understand correctly, bmc is saying that many people judge too quickly based on superficial things. They see what clothes you are wearing or what beer you are drinking and judge you negatively. This is certainly true. TickTock is a suggesting as a solution that we care less about what snobby people think about us.


And I am saying that they are wrong. It is not the judging itself that is wrong, it is when the judging is presumptuous or unsupported, that it becomes a problem.

You can certainly tell a lot about a person by what they are wearing, or what beer they drink. For instance, if someone were dressed in rags and, everytime I walked by them begged for money, I would probably judge that that person were homeless. I may have lots of other evidence for thinking this, too. If my friend only drank Yuengling and stated he wouldn't drink other countries' beer, I would probably judge he A.) Only liked American beer or B.) Was patriotic in some way. There's nothing wrong with this judgment. Even in this case, where I don't have a substantial amount of evidence, I wouldn't interpret this as morally wrong, or unsupported. I have good reason for judging as I did.

I am suggesting it is fine to care about what people think of us, whether they be snobby or not. Are you suggesting we should only care what non-snobby people think of us? Why? Is it because you think snobby people are wrong by default, because they're snobby? Well, that would be fallacious.
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 01:10 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;118536 wrote:
And I am saying that they are wrong. It is not the judging itself that is wrong, it is when the judging is presumptuous or unsupported, that it becomes a problem.


But that is what they are saying, just not as clearly.

Quote:
You can certainly tell a lot about a person by what they are wearing, or what beer they drink. For instance, if someone were dressed in rags and, everytime I walked by them begged for money, I would probably judge that that person were homeless. I may have lots of other evidence for thinking this, too. If my friend only drank Yuengling and stated he wouldn't drink other countries' beer, I would probably judge he A.) Only liked American beer or B.) Was patriotic in some way. There's nothing wrong with this judgment. Even in this case, where I don't have a substantial amount of evidence, I wouldn't interpret this as morally wrong, or unsupported. I have good reason for judging as I did.

I am suggesting it is fine to care about what people think of us, whether they be snobby or not. Are you suggesting we should only care what non-snobby people think of us? Why? Is it because you think snobby people are wrong by default, because they're snobby? Well, that would be fallacious.


Well, in your examples you are combining looks with a statement of some sort. Would you feel pressured to start drinking Yuengling because your friend is patriotic like that? That the kind of caring people mean when they say we shouldn't care what other people think. "Caring" is kind of broad but that's what I think it means in that context.

We tend to give irrational weight to other peoples opinions, because we are social creatures. I think that should be counteracted partly by self-affirmation. The instinct isn't going to disappear. We will always (and should) give consideration to other people's opinions. Don't you agree that if someone makes an unsupported and incorrect presumption about us we shouldn't pay it much heed? We shouldn't just start drinking American beer? That is necessarily true, given the number of conflicting opinions in the world.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 01:26 pm
@Yogi DMT,
Jebediah wrote:

Don't you agree that if someone makes an unsupported and incorrect presumption about us we shouldn't pay it much heed?


Even if it is incorrect, it still may be wise to pay it some attention. Sometimes it's better to demonstrate why the person shouldn't assume X means Y (if they shouldn't) - explain to them why what they say is fallacious.

But the point is we keep tossing general words and phrases around like, "judge" and "don't care what others think", but we mean specific circumstances. My point is that we should try to be as specific as possible when we use these words or phrases. If we are not, if we do not present a reasoned argument, we run the risk of doing just the thing that we feel so adamant against!
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 01:51 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;118548 wrote:
Even if it is incorrect, it still may be wise to pay it some attention. Sometimes it's better to demonstrate why the person shouldn't assume X means Y (if they shouldn't) - explain to them why what they say is fallacious.

But the point is we keep tossing general words and phrases around like, "judge" and "don't care what others think", but we mean specific circumstances. My point is that we should try to be as specific as possible when we use these words or phrases. If we are not, if we do not present a reasoned argument, we run the risk of doing just the thing that we feel so adamant against!


I think you make a good point. If we start with a truth, like "we shouldn't be too hasty when making judgments" and turn it into "don't make judgments" then we quickly reach the point where we are being inaccurate in our judgment of people who make judgments...
0 Replies
 
TickTockMan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Jan, 2010 03:14 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;118531 wrote:


But you can become disconsolate about anything, not simply those things we refer as superficial and material. I, for instance, become disconsolate regarding some things intellectual (which I discuss on this forum). Is this any better?


Of course not. I never intended to indicate that it was. You are correct, of course.
People become discouraged and depressed about all manner of things. Although from my own very narrow point of view, some things seem less worthy of becoming disconsolate about than others.

As for myself, I tend to get a bit bent out of shape now and then when people judge me to be morally deficient because I do not believe in God. Some people get depressed because their year-old cellphone isn't as hip and awesome as their friend's shiny new ultra-thin cellphone.

It all seems very case-specific, do you agree?

Zetherin;118531 wrote:
Once again, I'm looking for why you're targetting those things material and superficial, and dismissing everything else that people can, and do, obsess over and become disconsolate about. And, more importantly, I want to know why you think judging someone on their material possessions is necessarily fallacious (if you do... I got the impression you do, as you keep pointing it out).


I wasn't aware that I was dismissing anything. I chose to specifically explore material and superficial causes of unhappiness as that seemed to be the original flavor of this thread: that we live in a superficial and materialistic world which, apparently, some people believe, sucks.

I think the way the thread is going now is more interesting.


----------------------


p.s. You're wrong. Snobby people are morons, and their views and opinions are always to be regarded with a high degree of suspicion. If you would watch Meatballs and Caddyshack you would know this.
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 May, 2010 05:48 am
@Yogi DMT,
First off, school has in average more good than bad to offer people.

1) social interaction, may make bonds that last a lifetime, you can have friends that you may have a symbiotic relation to.
If you are a lawyer, and he is an accountee you can benefit from eachother.

2) you will learn about concepts which you can build upon, contrary a guy who have lived under a rock in some desolate primitive tribe, he will only have a ignorent view of the world, not knowing about geometry, math, verbs, history ..etc.

Such ignorent person wouldn't know how to read, thus never convey written information, nor read any information. He can't get a good job, only a paltry job ..he will in essence be a loser in a society.

3) without any basic education, you can't build upon the education with any higher education.

4) though I do agree that most stuff in school are outdated, rigid in it's teaching, that doesn't really fit reality.

Least in Denmark we are taught very advanced math which about 1% of the students will ever put to use, but we weren't taught how to fill our tax bill which all had a nessesity to do, fortunaly a few decades ago it was made a goverment task, but still there are many essential concepts we need to be taught.

4)
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/27/2020 at 12:33:37